Voter suppression

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is wrong with early voting?

Jaime Harrison of course has an eloquent answer to this:

+1

He's whining.
Of course the media is going to have a slanted take on this legislation.
Iowa can do what it needs to do to ensure the integrity of the vote.

Looks pretty reasonable to me:

What does Iowa's new election law do?

The law cuts Iowa's early voting period from 29 days to 20. Polls will now close at 8 p.m. for state and federal elections instead of 9 p.m.

It significantly tightens the rules for when absentee ballots must be received by county auditors in order to be counted. Ballots must now arrive by the time polls close in order to be counted. Previously, ballots placed in the mail the day before Election Day could be counted as long as they arrived by noon the following Monday.

Republicans have sharply criticized county auditors who they say acted inappropriately during the 2020 election. The law strips auditors of much of their discretion in running elections in their counties. Auditors may no longer establish satellite in-person early voting sites unless petitioned to do so by residents, and they may not mail absentee ballot request forms to voters unless a voter asks for one.

The law makes it a felony for auditors, or any other election officials, to fail to carry out state election laws or to violate guidance from the Iowa secretary of state. Auditors could also face fines of up to $10,000 for "technical infractions" of their duties.

The law also limits who can return a voter's absentee ballot. Only the voter, an immediate family member, household member or caregiver may return the ballot to the auditor's office or place it in the mail. Previously, anyone the voter designated could deliver the ballot on the voter's behalf, but the new law makes it a serious misdemeanor for any unauthorized person to do so. Republicans said the restriction is necessary to prevent "ballot harvesting" by political parties or outside groups.

The law allows counties to establish one ballot drop box at the auditor's office, under video surveillance.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/08/iowa-governor-kim-reynolds-signs-law-shortening-early-voting-closing-polls-earlier-election-day/6869317002/

And, I would note.....

33 states and DC all close polls at 8:00 pm or earlier.
https://www.270towin.com/poll-closing-times

This really screws military and overseas voters. Their ballots often arrive after Election Day.

Equal rules, no exceptions.

A different equal rule: Everyone can vote with an absentee ballot.

Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

Exactly. And since absentee ballots, vote by mail and early voting are currently used and are well known to be safe, everyone should be able to use these things. That's why these new laws are so silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

You are correct. So stop playing a different game than they are playing. All you're going to get is exceptions made for demographics that they think help them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

You are correct. So stop playing a different game than they are playing. All you're going to get is exceptions made for demographics that they think help them.

What precisely are you trying to say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

You are correct. So stop playing a different game than they are playing. All you're going to get is exceptions made for demographics that they think help them.

What precisely are you trying to say?

That saying, "what about seniors and the military?" is a bad argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

You are correct. So stop playing a different game than they are playing. All you're going to get is exceptions made for demographics that they think help them.

What precisely are you trying to say?

That saying, "what about seniors and the military?" is a bad argument.

Okay? So let everyone vote via absentee ballot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

You are correct. So stop playing a different game than they are playing. All you're going to get is exceptions made for demographics that they think help them.

What precisely are you trying to say?

That saying, "what about seniors and the military?" is a bad argument.

DP...the GOP is literally disenfranchising seniors and the military with this legislation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds good to me. Either it's safe and everyone should be able to do it or it's unsafe and nobody should. No more of these different rules for whatever demographic the party in power thinks will hurt or help them.

J.F.C. This isn’t a “both sides” problem, this is exclusively a Republican obsession with reducing Democrats’ (specifically Black peoples’) ability to vote. Come back when you’re serious.

You are correct. So stop playing a different game than they are playing. All you're going to get is exceptions made for demographics that they think help them.

What precisely are you trying to say?

That saying, "what about seniors and the military?" is a bad argument.

DP...the GOP is literally disenfranchising seniors and the military with this legislation.

Because they screwed up their drafting. They will gladly make an exception for seniors and the military because they believe those groups are part of their base. They're tryng to disenfranchise everybody. It's a values disagreement not a policy one. If it's safe, then it is safe for everybody. If it's unsafe, then it needs to be fixed for everybody. Incrementalizing based on demographics doesn't improve the problem, it reinforces it.

[Anonymous]

Someone try to help me remember to look this up tomorrow:

[Anonymous]